even before Israel was given back to the jews and supported by the USA, we treated the muzzies as an enemy - for a good reason - they act like rabid animals
that our politicians and military leaders want or pretend to help them is folly some people never learn - especially muzzies they will learn to control their radicals or suffer more attacks and deaths On Dec 1, 12:34 pm, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > The NewForeignPolicy.comGlobal > News:Passport:Ricks:Drezner:Walt:Rothkopf:LynchThe Cable:The AfPak Blog:Net > Effect:Shadow Govt.:Madam Secretary:The CallWhy they hate us (II): How many > Muslims has the U.S. killed in the past 30 years?Mon, 11/30/2009 - 12:38pm > Tom Friedman had an especially fatuouscolumnin Sunday'sNew YorkTimes,which is > saying something given his well-established capacity for smug self-assurance. > According to Friedman, the big challenge we face in the Arab and Islamic > world is "the Narrative" -- his patronizing term for Muslim views about > America's supposedly negative role in the region. If Muslims weren't so > irrational, he thinks, they would recognize that "U.S. foreign policy has > been largely dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from > tyranny." He concedes that we made a few mistakes here and there (such as at > Abu Ghraib), but the real problem is all those anti-American fairy tales that > Muslims tell each other to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions. > I heard a different take on this subject at a recent conference on U.S. > relations with the Islamic world. In addition to hearing a diverse set of > views from different Islamic countries, one of the other participants (a > prominent English journalist) put it quite simply. "If the United States > wants to improve its image in the Islamic world," he said, "it should stop > killing Muslims." > Now I don't think the issue is quite that simple, but the comment got me > thinking: How many Muslims has the United States killed in the past thirty > years, and how many Americans have been killed by Muslims? Coming up with a > precise answer to this question is probably impossible, but it is also not > necessary, because the rough numbers are so clearly lopsided. > Here's my back-of-the-envelope analysis, based on estimates deliberately > chosen to favor the United States. Specifically, I have taken the low > estimates of Muslim fatalities, along with much more reliable figures for > U.S. deaths.To repeat:I have deliberately selected "low-end" estimates for > Muslim fatalities, so these figures present the "best case" for the United > States. Even so, the United States has killed nearly 30 Muslims for every > American lost. The real ratio is probably much higher, and a reasonable upper > bound for Muslim fatalities (based mostly on higher estimates of "excess > deaths" in Iraq due to the sanctions regime and the post-2003 occupation) is > well over onemillion,equivalent to over 100 Muslim fatalities for every > American lost. > Figures like these should be used with caution, of course, and several > obvious caveats apply. To begin with, the United States is not solely > responsible for some of those fatalities, most notably in the case of the > "excess deaths" attributable to the U.N. sanctions regime against Iraq. > Saddam Hussein clearly deserves much of the blame for these "excess deaths," > insofar as he could have complied with Security Council resolutions and > gotten the sanctions lifted or used the "oil for food" problem properly. > Nonetheless, the fact remains that the United States (and the other SC > members) knew that keeping the sanctions in place would cause tens of > thousands of innocent people to die and we went ahead anyway. > Similarly, the United States is not solely to blame for the sectarian > violence that engulfed Iraq after the 2003 invasion. U.S. forces killed many > Iraqis, to be sure, but plenty of Shiites, Kurds, Sunnis, and foreign > infiltrators were pulling triggers and planting bombs too. Yet it is still > the case that the United States invaded a country that had not attacked us, > dismantled its regime, and took hardly any precautions to prevent the > (predictable) outbreak of violence. Having uncapped the volcano, we are > hardly blameless, and that goes for pundits like Friedman who > enthusiastically endorsed the original invasion. > Third, the fact that people died as a result of certain U.S. actions does not > by itself mean that those policy decisions were wrong. I'm a realist, and I > accept the unfortunate fact that international politics is a rough business > and sometimes innocent people die as a result of actions that may in fact be > justifiable. For example, I don't think it was wrong to expel Iraq from > Kuwait in 1991 or to topple the Taliban in 2001. Nor do I think it was wrong > to try to catch Bin Laden -- even though people died in the attempt -- and I > would support similar efforts to capture him today even if it placed more > people at risk. In other words, a full assessment of U.S. policy would have > to weigh these regrettable costs against the alleged benefits to the United > States itself or the international community as a whole. > Yet if you really want to know "why they hate us," the numbers presented > above cannot be ignored. Even if we view these figures with skepticism and > discount the numbersa lot,the fact remains that the United States has killed > a very large number of Arab or Muslim individuals over the past three > decades. Even though we had just cause and the right intentions in some cases > (as in the first Gulf War), our actions were indefensible (maybe even > criminal) in others. > It is also striking to observe that virtually all of the Muslim deaths were > the direct or indirect consequence of official U.S. government policy. By > contrast, most of the Americans killed by Muslims were the victims of > non-state terrorist groups such as al Qaeda or the insurgents in Iraq and > Afghanistan. Americans should also bear in mind that the figures reported > above omit the Arabs and Muslims killed by Israel in Lebanon, Gaza, and the > West Bank. Given our generous and unconditional support for Israel's policy > towards the Arab world in general and the Palestinians in particular, Muslims > rightly hold us partly responsible for those victims too. > Contrary to what Friedman thinks, our real problem isn't a fictitious Muslim > "narrative" about America's role in the region; it is mostly the actual > things we have been doing in recent years. To say that in no way justifies > anti-American terrorism or absolves other societies of responsibility for > their own mistakes or misdeeds. But the self-righteousness on display in > Friedman's op-ed isn't just simplistic; it is actively harmful. Why? Because > whitewashing our own misconduct makes it harder for Americans to figure out > why their country is so unpopular and makes us less likely to consider > different (and more effective) approaches. > Some degree of anti-Americanism may reflect ideology, distorted history, or a > foreign government's attempt to shift blame onto others (a practice that all > governments indulge in), but a lot of it is the inevitable result of policies > that the American people have supported in the past. When you kill tens of > thousands of people in other countries -- and sometimes for no good reason -- > you shouldn't be surprised when people in those countries are enraged by this > behavior and interested in revenge. After all, how did we react after > September > 11? http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/11/30/why_they_hate_us_ii_how_many_muslims_has_the_us_killed_in_the_past_30_years -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
